Jung Definitions of Ti and Fi
I was responding to a post yesterday in another thread and I got out my Psychological Types by Jung and consulted it about the original definition of Fe and Te. In researching that, I realized I am not F according to Carl Jung's definition of F because I do not put accepted values feelings over what I perceive is the 'real' truth of something. And I don't Te as much as I Ti (which was more clear cut for me to figure out using Jung's definitions).
So I am back to thinking of myself in context to being an INTP. My friend says emphatically I am an INFJ with undeveloped Fe, which could be true. I respect this belief of his because he is pretty good at typing and knows me pretty well. I could have skipped the development of my Fe and gone straight to Ti instead which is hypothesized to be the function developed third in an INFJ. This is a theory I do not necessarily espouse, in fact I have iterated on Type C somewhere else that I am more in line with Jung's thinking about it. His thinking is that the dominant function is oriented inward or outward and all other functions are opposed to that orientation. Meaning if someone were Ni-dom, all their other function preferences would be extraverted
in people with normal development. For those of us who suffered abuse or neglect, I believe we get a smorgasbord of functions going on, and there is no applicable rule.
Whether or not I was originally intended to be an xnfj by nature matters little if by nurture I developed functions more in line with an intp. This is where the fulcrum exists for a person's nature vs nurture development; the launching place for becoming a different person. Perhaps?
However, It is also conceivable I first used Ti then instead of developing the proper Ne, I turned my Ni inward. I have conscious memories of noticing patterns when I was young and having this almost-OCD type quality of needing things to be symmetrical. Which I now perceive as being an Ne/Se drive.? I have always been very good at guesstimating as well, into the crazy realm where N is required. But I am definitely more Ni than Ne, at least as far as I know.
Anyway, I will further explore Ti and Fi here to see if I can shed some more light on my function preferences (since there are not great tests yet for them).
~~~
Ti Psychological Types pps. 380-386:
Ti is primarily oriented by the subjective factor; it does not lead from concrete experience back again to the object, but always to the subjective content. External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, though the introvert would often like to make his thinking appear so. It begins with the subject and leads back to the subject, though it may range far into the realm of actual reality. New views rather than knowledge of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories, it opens up new prospects and insights, but with regard to facts its attitude is one of reserve. Facts are okay as examples, but they must not be allowed to predominate; they are only used as evidence for a theory. What is of paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, of the initial symbolic image hovering darkly before the mind's eye; the shaping of that image into a luminous idea. It wants to reach reality. The creative power of this thinking shows itself when it actually creates an idea which manifests as a suitable expression of it.
Its task is completed when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.
The accumulation of facts (Te) paralyzes thought and smothers their meaning. Kant represents this Ti thinking type. Ti types are strongly influenced by ideas, originating in the subjective realm. He will follow his ideas like the extravert, but in the reverse direction. Intensity is his aim, not extensity. His judgment appears cold, inflexible, arbitrary, and ruthless, because it relates far less to the object than the subject. He may be polite, amiable, and kind, but one is constantly aware of a certain uneasiness betraying an ulterior motive--the disarming of an opponent, who must at all costs be pacified and placated lest he prove himself a nuisance. He will never not a think a thought because it might be dangerous, subversive, heretical, or wounding to other's feelings. Yet he will feel badly if he has to make it an objective reality. And when he introduces his ideas to the world, he does not do it gracefully, but dumps them there and gets extremely annoyed if they fail to thrive on their own.
He is impractical. Others must bow to its truth. He will rarely go out of his way to win anyone's appreciation of it, but if he does, he does so clumsily and it has the opposite effect intended. He usually has bad experiences with rivals in his own field because he never understands how to curry their favor; as a rule he only succeeds in showing them how entirely superfluous they are to him. In pursuit of his ideas he is generally stubborn, headstrong, and quite unamenable to influence.
Yet he will lay himself open to the most undesirable elements, which can seize hold of him from the unconscious. He lets himself be brutalized and exploited in the most ignominious ways if only he can be left in peace to pursue his ideas. lol
In his personal relations he is tacitern or else throws himself on people who cannot understand him, or for him this is one more proof of the abysmal stupidity of man. He is easy prey, or he may develop into a misanthropic bachelor with a childlike heart. He can be childishly naive. Casual acquaintances think him inconsiderate and domineering, but the better one knows him, the more favorable one's judgment becomes, and his closest friends value his intimacy very highly.
To outsiders he seems unapproachable and arrogant and sometimes soured. (this is why i didn't do well as a teacher perhaps). As a teacher he has little influence, since the mentality of his students is strange to him. Teaching holds little interest for him unless it provides him with a theoretical problem. He is a poor teacher, because he is not concerned enough with the object(s) receiving the information.
Outside influences are shut off and he becomes rigid in his convictions. He may become surly, even burst out with vicious retorts......ok that is enough! I think we get the picture.
I AM TOTALLY TI. Don't know what is stronger though, my Ti or Ni. hmmmm.
I will do Fi later. I want to think now.
Ideas influence me. Source impresses me. Pure concepts impress me.
